Regrowth percentage

[Wwiizzkkiidd24]

I was just flicking through results on another website and came across this. Is he one of the lucky ones or is that how good these doctors have got at doing fue. I think the picture says it all to be honest.

[hairshopeing]

Erdogan result?

[Melvin- Admin]

its a combo of good techs and surgeon, I also believe some genetic attributes contribute to the overall success.

[Stig]

Nah - looks like a Feller FUT to me

[farmcat]

It's an Erdogan result. Just right click and do a google search for the image.

[Wwiizzkkiidd24]

It's definitely not one of fellers results I couldn't find a procedure over 2000 fue grafts done by feller going back nearly 2 years.

 

If you Google it you will find out who's result it is.

 

Imo losing 56 grafts out 3000 is worth not having a linear scar but hey that's just me .

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

Wwizz,

 

There are a lot of variables involved in FUE growth. I won't go into it too much here, but it has a LOT to do with the patient's own physiology (give Dr Rassman and Bernstein's original "FOX" paper a read if you're interested), the resilience of their grafts, and the surgical protocol. Even in good candidates, however, the average yields won't be near strip levels (IE the growth demonstrated in this case). This is a universally accepted fact. The debate, however, comes when discussing how much the average yield of FUE differs. I don't want to start a war on your thread, but all the evidence I've seen -- both in studies and my own experience -- tells me it's somewhere in the high 70s to low 80s.

[Wwiizzkkiidd24]

I get there's a lot of variables that go into having a successful procedure if you're a good candidate you're a good candidate if your not you're not I get that. but if you have the combination of all those attributes there's no reason you can't have a high success growth rate like this gentlemen in the photo IE 90 or above I'm not buying that it's around low 70s to low 80s I think if it's done right with someone that knows what they are doing there's no reason you can't get above 90% growth rate. I get fue isn't quite near fuss but it's closer then you think otherwise it wouldn't be so popular or growing so popular anyway I think if people got an fue and got just above 70 growth yield we would hear bout it and simply I have not seen that any where just you and doc feller think so.

 

That's proof in the picture that it's possible.

[Wwiizzkkiidd24]

here's another one that'suites way above low 70s to low 80s

[delancey]

Wwizz,

 

There are a lot of variables involved in FUE growth. I won't go into it too much here, but it has a LOT to do with the patient's own physiology (give Dr Rassman and Bernstein's original "FOX" paper a read if you're interested), the resilience of their grafts, and the surgical protocol. Even in good candidates, however, the average yields won't be near strip levels (IE the growth demonstrated in this case). This is a universally accepted fact. The debate, however, comes when discussing how much the average yield of FUE differs. I don't want to start a war on your thread, but all the evidence I've seen -- both in studies and my own experience -- tells me it's somewhere in the high 70s to low 80s.

 

Dr. Ron Shapiro recently said in an interview that "a good FUE transplanter should be able to get at least very close to the same growth rate (as FUT) at least 80% of the time." Note that the interview is available on Youtube and its title is: Are FUE Results Weaker than FUSS Results?

[Wwiizzkkiidd24]

Dr. Ron Shapiro recently said in an interview that "a good FUE transplanter should be able to get at least very close to the same growth rate (as FUT) at least 80% of the time." Note that the interview is available on Youtube and its title is: Are FUE Results Weaker than FUSS Results?

 

exactly my point delancey and he knows what he's talking about. you should get very close to strip level growth 80 percent of the time. granted strip still has that edge but not by a lot. this is obviously how strip was in its infancy and people was sceptical that it could produce nearly 100 percent growth rate or near 100 now it's the gold standard ht and fue is still in its infancy compared to strip. like the great doctor said at the end of the video "only time will tell"

[Sethticles]

I don't want to start a war on your thread, but.

 

Blake baiting us all again.... we all know he's smirking away at his desk right now

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

Delancy,

 

I'm not sure where the 80% number came from, but here's what Dr Ron told a patient last week during a consultation:

"Analogy Dr. Shapiro used was 10 patients come in for FUT and FUE, 5 of 10 will achieve equivalent results. "

 

So here he's saying 50% will grow at the level of strip yield. This is equivalent to what Drs Rassman and Bernstein quoted in their original "FOX" paper 15 years ago. They said around 30% of patients are "FOX 1 or 2s" which meant they were "very good or good" candidates for FUE. This means growth rates would be acceptable. Another 25 or 35% or so were "FOX 3" which meant they were essentially decent candidates and growth should be comparable. Put that together and you get roughly the 50% Dr Shapiro quoted earlier.

[Wwiizzkkiidd24]

in that video he said 3 out of 10 people won't grow near the level of strip so I don't know why you're saying he's changed he's mind to half of the patients now

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

Wwizz,

 

I don't think we are actually disagreeing here. If you have the great characteristics and match up with a good surgeon, there is no reason to believe you can't get the 90% growth you're discussing above.

 

But this begs the question: do you have the great characteristics? And the answer: you don't know. I don't know. And unless the surgeon does the type of testing I discussed above, there is really no way to know until the deed is done.

 

And if you really look around at a lot of the cases being shared and discussed, you'll see the average yields I'm referring to (75-80%). They are passed off as other things, but really take some time to look and you'll see this pattern emerge.

 

But I'm not here to dissuade you. It seems like you want to go the FUE route, and I only wish you the best! However, my big pet peeve is people going into any hair transplant procedure without true "informed consent." Based on the research and general consensus from practicing surgeons, FUE yield is lower than FUT. Estimated averages vary, but I believe it's 75-80% -- and believe me, it's not hard for a procedure with less consistent results to gain popularity in medicine/surgery as long as it's perceived as newer or less invasive; this is a timeless tale in the medical world. This isn't saying you can't obtain the 90%+ you described above if the stars align, but averages exist for a reason.

 

There you go! That statement is really the only reason to even have this discussion. If you've read it and still feel like FUE is the best choice for you, then you are fully informed and have the capacity to make your own personal decision. I wish you the best of luck and I hope you'll keep us updated on your progress!

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

Wwizz,

 

So now it's 70% and not 80%? I'll have to go watch the video.

 

Here is where the 50% number comes from:

 

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/180883-pics-stats-first-surgery-way-6.html#post2446704

 

And this was in a private conversation with a patient who was considering both FUE and FUT with Dr Ron, and booked for FUT.

[delancey]

Blake,

 

Please watch the video on Youtube. Here Dr. Ron Shapiro clearly states that "a good FUE transplanter should be able to get at least very close to the same growth rate (as FUT) at least 80% of the time."

[Wwiizzkkiidd24]

yes give the video a watch it's very interesting

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

Just watched the video ...

 

Didn't realize it was one I'd actually seen before. He says several important things:

 

1) "3/10 times you'll get worse growth with FUE because the grafts are more fragile" (he notes that this occurs even when you go out of your way to preserve the grafts -- and this is very likely because the damage is actually done during the extraction process).

 

2) "A very good FUE transplater should be able to get CLOSE to a similar growth rate at least 80% of the time."

 

3) "There IS an increased risk [of lower growth] so sometimes it will be less" (note that this is said right after the 80% estimate -- which I take to mean that it does occur even WITH a good 'FUE transplanter' who is taking every precaution he described above).

 

4) "So if you really want to be 100% of the time ... and when I see the two ... I still think FUT has the edge."

 

So what is he actually saying here:

1) Approximately 1/3rd of the time you're going to have a VISIBLY lesser yield

 

2) 20% of the time you're not going to get the same growth, even when all precautions are taken

 

3) FUT growth is still the most reliable

 

I know I'm a little louder than Dr Ron, but this actually 100% in line with what I've been saying the whole time.

 

And again, this isn't anything crazy. I'm not sitting here saying FUE = bad and everyone should 'go strip or go home!' But I'm just saying that there are physiological reasons why FUE grows less on average. Patients should be aware of these when making their decision. A good chunk of guys will still accept this risk as a trade off for not having the linear scar, and that's perfectly fine!

 

Is that really so crazy?? Maybe I've lost it. Haha.

[Wwiizzkkiidd24]

fut in its infancy wasn't reliable. (interviewer) "it kind of reminds me of when fut was in its infancy".

 

let's face it FUE IS still in its infancy even though it's been around for a long time simply because there aren't as many patients as FUT to go by. so yes FUT still has that edge over its foe but not by much. the more patients there is that have FUE the more proof of the pudding as such. so only time will tell.

[delancey]

I believe that there are FUE clinics that are producing excellent results on a consistent basis. I also believe that these clinics are changing the lives of thousands of patients world wide every year. This should be the end goal of each clinic, namely to make as many patients satisfied as possible. I believe that we are seeing this with FUE. I believe that it is a procedure that is evolving and giving patients options. These are all positives, for anyone who suffers from hair loss. Finally, I disagree with the notion that FUE cannot be a standalone option for many people, even higher Norwood patients who may need 5,000-6000 grafts. We have seen this being done, time and again, successfully, by the best FUE practitioners. The results speak for themselves.

 

As for the yield, I will let this quote speak for itself: "a good FUE transplanter should be able to get at least very close to the same growth rate (as FUT) at least 80% of the time." I interpret this as meaning that 80% of those who have an FUE with a good FUE practitioner can expect a yield that is either higher, equal or slightly below FUT yield.

 

Even someone as experienced and knowledgeable as the forum moderator, David, was willing to travel to India to have an FUE procedure. I think this speaks for itself.

 

Just my two cents.

[Wwiizzkkiidd24]

I believe that there are FUE clinics that are producing excellent results on a consistent basis. I also believe that these clinics are changing the lives of thousands of patients world wide every year. This should be the end goal of each clinic, namely to make as many patients satisfied as possible. I believe that we are seeing this with FUE. I believe that it is a procedure that is evolving and giving patients options. These are all positives, for anyone who suffers from hair loss. Finally, I disagree with the notion that FUE cannot be a standalone option for many people, even higher Norwood patients who may need 5,000-6000 grafts. We have seen this being done, time and again, successfully, by the best FUE practitioners. The results speak for themselves.[\QUOTE]

 

totally agree mate its been done and will continue to be done with greater expectations as time goes on. I think if you need 8-10k grafts then by all means go for fut then fue. but if you don't need that many grafts fue could offer just the right amount of grafts you need as a stand alone procedure. IE 5-6 maybe even 7k grafts if your lucky through fue.

 

 

As for the yield, I will let this quote speak for itself: "a good FUE transplanter should be able to get at least very close to the same growth rate (as FUT) at least 80% of the time." I interpret this as meaning that 80% of those who have an FUE with a good FUE practitioner can expect a yield that is either higher, equal or slightly below FUT yield.[\QUOTE]

 

and it will only get better as the years go by and the transplanter gets a better understanding of how to get close to fut percentages.

 

Even someone as experienced and knowledgeable as the forum moderator, David, was willing to travel to India to have an FUE procedure. I think this speaks for itself

 

Just my two cents.

 

that's says it all to be honest.

[Melvin- Admin]

Just watched the video ...

 

 

 

 

So what is he actually saying here:

1) Approximately 1/3rd of the time you're going to have a VISIBLY lesser yield

 

2) 20% of the time you're not going to get the same growth, even when all precautions are taken

 

3) FUT growth is still the most reliable

 

I know I'm a little louder than Dr Ron, but this actually 100% in line with what I've been saying the whole time.

 

And again, this isn't anything crazy. I'm not sitting here saying FUE = bad and everyone should 'go strip or go home!' But I'm just saying that there are physiological reasons why FUE grows less on average. Patients should be aware of these when making their decision. A good chunk of guys will still accept this risk as a trade off for not having the linear scar, and that's perfectly fine!

 

Is that really so crazy?? Maybe I've lost it. Haha.

 

I like to look at it this way Blake

 

 

1) Approximately 2/3rd of the time you're going to have VISIBLY the SAME yield

 

2) 80% of the time you're going to get the same growth.

 

3) FUT growth is still the most reliable but comes with a big scar from ear to ear for life, and poor growth can still occur

[FUE2014]

Here is another link which indicates from Janna (Snr Tech from Shapiro) that Shapiro are closing the yield gap between FUT & FUE

 

Dr. Paul Shapiro-8 Months FUE RESULT ? 2226grafts/4497hairs - Dr. Paul Shapiro - Hairtransplant Doctors - Click on a Doctors name to view their results - Hairloss Experiences Hairloss Forum

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

Again, I'm not trying to be argumentative or inflammatory here, but Janna isn't saying anything different either:

 

"I do think that yield in general for FUE procedures are still slightly lower than that of strip, however. I read that one of the Turkish doctors told his patient to expect 85% yield. I've personally heard from quite a few FUE doctors say 70%-90% is the norm"

 

(85 + 70 + 90)/3 = 81%, which falls right within the 75 - 80% average I've said the whole time -- and, according to Janna, this data comes from FUE doctors themselves (including the ones in Turkey).

 

"We've always felt our strip yields approx. 98%+ and fue is now closer to 90-95%. We will keep trying to achieve 98% or better with our fue."

 

Strip at 98% consistently ("always") and FUE getting "closer" and "trying" to achieve similar yields. And remember that Shapiro medical has been doing FUE for a long, long time.

 

"as I stated before, 70-90% range is what few of the top fue clinics were telling me was their typical yield rate."

 

"Top FUE clinics" stating the same things I've said before (and actually, 70% is lower than what I quoted).

 

"Patients I have spoken to were fully aware the yield tends to be less than strip but felt it was worth it to have small white dots instead of the linear scar."

 

Now that's informed consent! Thumbs up, Janna. Totally agree with this overall approach.

 

Reference: Dr. Paul Shapiro-8 Months FUE RESULT ? 2226grafts/4497hairs - Dr. Paul Shapiro - Hairtransplant Doctors - Click on a Doctors name to view their results - Hairloss Experiences Hairloss Forum